As I watched Biden's press conference, filmed at what amounts to a movie set of the Oval office, I couldn't help but notice his response to questions he found uncomfortable. When asked when the "free" COVID tests that Biden promised would be available by now were, Biden chose to sit silently ignoring the question, until saved by someone announcing the end of the press conference.
Of course Biden's approval numbers are in the tank. And his press secretary announced that you won't notice inflation if you don't buy things.
The jobs numbers are reported in a misleading way (compared with unemployment at the height of the pandemic, rather than Dec/Jan 2020/21.
Then there's the complete and utter failure to stop COVID as promised, the fact that Harris hasn't done anything about the crisis at the border (not even a photo op), and the bizarre attempt to lower meat prices by throwing money at the problem.
I think it's safe to say that Biden's first year hasn't been what he promised or what his supporters wanted.
It's only going to get harder after the midterms.
FYI, there's lots of talk about starting impeachment against Biden if the GOP takes control of the house after the midterms. I'd like to go on record now as saying that (in the absence of something beyond incompetence) it would be a mistake to do so. I understand that the DFL laid the groundwork for this with it's ridiculous attempt to impeach Trump after he was out of office, and I understand the desire to give them a dose of their own medicine, I think that it would be a mistake to do so. If the GOP takes control of either house of congress, they should spend their time in a conservative legislative agenda. They should flood the senate or the White House with legislation. Starting with an actual budget. That's how you differentiate yourselves from the DFL, you actually legislate. On some level it would be satisfying to impeach Biden, but on the off chance that it succeeds, do you really want to allow Harris to run as an incumbent in 24?
For those who might argue that the politicized impeachment trend started when Clinton was impeached, I'll simply point out that Clinton had actually found guilty of contempt and , and was punished with unprecedented legal penalties.
"In her finding of contempt of court, Judge Wright issued a scalding opinion saying the “record demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence” that Clinton at the deposition gave “false, misleading and evasive answers that were designed to obstruct the judicial process.”
Simply stated, Wright wrote, “the President’s deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false ….”
The penalty the judge imposed was unprecedented: No court had held a sitting president in contempt, as I note in 1995, adding that Wright also ordered the president to pay nearly $90,000 to cover legal fees and other expenses that Jones’s lawyers incurred as a result of the falsehoods he told under oath.” The lawyers had sought nearly $500,000."
Like it or not, Clinton had clearly been found to have been in contempt of court and to have intentionally tried to obstruct the legal process. I didn't support impeaching Clinton then, I didn't support impeaching Trump then, and I don't support impeaching Biden now.
I was blessed to experience the wonders of the miraculous Biden economic boom today. Went into a drug store looking for a particular item. Not only did they not have what I was looking for, they didn't have any of the equivalent items that might have been a good substitute. But, as I walked through the store I noticed that about 40% of the facings were empty. What the hell is this, the Soviet Union back in the day? How can we possibly call this economy better, when we literally don't have full store shalves?
49 comments:
RE: Impeaching Biden. The notion is fraught with problems, though I don't believe Harris as an incumbent would be any more likely to win her own term because she took over. No one likes here regardless of one's party....except maybe Dan, who isn't at all bright.
Incompetence would have to be his main defense, and it would be an easy argument to make given his massive failures thus far (I can't see how it's likely he could overcome his first year's failures without failing more instead). But it's also hard to believe there are no crimes and/or misdemeanors in there somewhere. Impeachment is indeed a sketchy endeavor, but as the founders provided for it, I wouldn't go so far as to say it couldn't be appropriate ever, and certainly not for this buffoon.
But I agree that I don't think it's worth the time of a GOP majority who has their own issues which only effective legislating can resolve. They would need a slam dunk case to proceed with such a move, to the extent that even Dems could see it and would want it. But Joe might be too good a puppet for them to want it.
Regarding impeachment, of course, the difference between Trump and Biden is that Trump legitimately did engage in all kinds of behavior that was at least reasonably considered impeachable. The majority of the nation agrees with this.
Biden, on the other hand, simply has done nothing impeachable. He hasn't. There's nothing there. Zero. There's nothing to HINT of an impeachable offense. Nothing.
Do you understand that chasmic difference?
Craig... "Like it or not, Clinton had clearly been found to have been in contempt of court and to have intentionally tried to obstruct the legal process. "
Like it or not, Trump had clearly been found to have obstructed justice (because of course he did, come on) and has clearly passed on a stupidly false and dangerous false claim, just as a point of fact. I supported Clinton being removed from office or resigning in disgrace (if he didn't do that, I kept pushing Democrats to force him to resign by applying pressure) and his "crimes" were so embarrassing and stupidly personal and small (not that cheating on one's spouse or abusing one's power to sleep with young women is "small," in an individual life, but as far as a nation is concerned, it's a blip of nothingness). Integrity matters. Abusing one's position is wrong and we MUST not abide by any serious abuses of power. For those reasons, I pushed to have Clinton removed or to resign.
Trump's abuses of power, deliberate and dangerous lies and utter corruption are an ocean to Clinton's puddle. Where are the Republicans with integrity who will try to hold Trump accountable? I mean, they're there - the ultra-conservative and honest Liz Cheney, George Will and some others... but by and large, the GOP has sold its soul for cheap power.
And as noted, while Clinton and Trump clearly did do something that can reasonably be called impeachable, Biden simply has not.
https://time.com/5573521/donald-trump-obstruction-justice/
Art,
I think that a strong argument could be made that a big part of the failure of the Biden administration so far was to encourage the political impeachment process that wasted significant time and got in the way of actually governing.
I've concluded that impeachment should be reserved for major things, or for a culture of pervasive corruption that can't be ignored. I realize that this may amount to giving someone a "pass" on something, but I think that it's worth the trade off.
Dan,
Like it or not, I can choose to believe the judge who sentenced Clinton, or I can believe you and your excuses. In this case a qualified person (the judge) was quite clear in finding Clinton had engaged in intentional obstruction. I'm unaware of anything remotely similar in the case of Trump. Because you and other partisans "find" something, doesn't mean anything.
I do love your unprovable claims about what you allegedly did in regards Clinton, while trying to minimize Clinton's actions. It's kind of cute.
I'd argue that the "republicans of integrity" (integrity being defined as doing what Dan thinks is right), held Trump accountable by not supporting his reelection. Not campaigning for him, and disagreeing with his claims re election tampering. (Again, we're ignoring the reality that Hillary and many other dems made the same sorts of bullshit claims after the 2016 election. Back then, it was "the Russians did it".)
The problem is simply that there is not enough evidence to charge Trump with a crime, just like there hasn't been enough evidence to charge the 1/6 rioters with "insurrection", sedition" or treason.
1. That's your opinion, and I don't usually accept opinion polls as Truth. Of course many of the "things" Trump has done or is accused of doing were before he became president, those aren't impeachable. Trump is out of office, it's over, let it go. If someone finds something that rises to the level of a chargeable crime, then charge him. Until then, it's just a bunch of mostly partisan bullshit. NOTE: I'm NOT suggesting that Trump is even remotely virtuous, moral, or free from fault. I am suggesting that we live in a nation where things like evidence and due process are needed before we throw someone in jail.
2. Yes. You could have figured out that I "know the difference" by reading the post where I argued AGAINST impeaching Biden. Ignorance, incompetence, and ineffectiveness aren't impeachable offenses. FYI, both Art and I have been quite clear that impeaching Biden is a bad idea. Unfortunately, it's unlikely that you'll acknowledge that impeaching Trump was also a bad idea.
Again with the overstating and hyperbole. I see no reason to agree with your overblown hysteria.
You mean a "rich white" guy like OJ?
Craig... "I've concluded that impeachment should be reserved for major things, or for a culture of pervasive corruption that can't be ignored."
On THAT, I agree wholeheartedly. Which is why, for Clinton, I wanted to see him removed by peer pressure, not impeachment.
Where we disagree is the shocking inability of modern conservatives to recognize who perversely corrupt and dangerously dishonest the Trump administration was. You all (the ones who didn't really support him or vote for him, but who remain faithful GOP types) were like, "Yeah, he's not as good as I'd like...." as if his failures were minor, typical failures common to all politicians.
Listen to the historians (from across the political spectrum) to the experts and scholars... they'll tell you. He was dangerously corrupt and abnormal. Precisely why there should be impeachment processes. What we've seen, though, is that only works if all parties can be objective in their assessment of dangerous, disordered people like Trump.
The modern failure in politics is not Trump. He's an aberration. The problem is the modern GOP that sold their souls to him.
Do you even read my posts/comment before you comment?
I literally said that I don't think Clinton should have been impeached, but at least he was impeached because he was found to have committed an actual crime while he was in office. If a judge finds that Trump actively engaged in obstruction while he was in office (as Clinton did), things might be different. But at this point, Trump has not been charged with, let alone found guilty of any crimes committed in office. The fact that you think Clinton (who was actually found to have obstructed justice) should have been peer pressured out, while Trump (who's innocent of any violation of the law while in office at this point) should have been impeached and should be in jail. Double standard much?
No, the GOP hasn't "sold it's soul" to Trump. (maybe some people have, but clearly not the party) The problem is that it doesn't matter who the GOP runs for POTUS, folx like you will say the same crap about them that you did about Trump, while remaining silent/quiet about the failures of DFL politicians. Just remember all the vile, nasty shit y'all said about Ben Carson. Just look at how any black conservative on social media gets treated by y'all (house nigger, uncle Tom, and the like are just the beginning).
Look I understand that it's easier to bash Trump that it is to defend Biden. I really sympathize, but y'all get so worked up about the past that you ignore the present.
I still have no idea what corruption people like Dan reference when demonizing Trump. I still await an example of a "lie" perpetrated by Trump which has in any way impacted anything in a negative way. Dan continues to whine about Trump's concerns about the election being a "damnable lie", though there's still investigations uncovering problems with the election. More stupidly, Dan expects intelligent people to believe the notion of a stolen election never crossed anyone's mind until Trump broached the subject. Trump's four years in office provided multiple examples supporting the notion that Dem criminality was neccessary for Trump to lose in 2020. Dems were doing all they could to overturn his election throughout that time. With all the morons convinced Hillary would beat him, her loss became more and more apparent as the night went on. She wasn't leading big into the wee hours only to "suddenly" get trounced out of the blue. And for the morons to claim 2020 was the fairest election in US history??? That's what "delusion" truly looks like.
I think it's important to remember that Trump was acquitted of all charges in both attempts to impeach him. Now, I believe the process allows haters to rightly insist he was impeached, as I believe the term refers more to bringing charges as opposed to the outcome of any trial or hearing. Regardless, he was not found guilty of anything.
Craig... " the GOP hasn't "sold it's soul" to Trump. (maybe some people have, but clearly not the party) "
You aren't this naive. This ignorant. Most honest conservatives who stood opposed to Trump have either left or been run out of office and out of the GOP. The few who remain have been severely ostracized by the GOP, such as Cheney, who's been rejected by the GOP.
You know this, right? You know that the modern GOP is mostly beholden to Trump and the few who remain who might be opposed to him are either hiding in the shadows and remaining silent or are being actively hounded by the majority of Trump's party.
Tell me you know this. It's important to me to know that you aren't THAT blinded to the degree which Trump bullies and controls your flaccid party.
https://time.com/6102500/donald-trump-gop-control/
And what about Biden? He's doing what he can. He has committed NO crimes. He's been relatively decent and honest. He managed to get the infrastructure bill passed. And yes, he's still fighting the same pandemic that Trump floundered his way through and mostly denied was a problem. What does that prove? The pandemic is beyond Biden's control and he's doing what he can about it. What more should he be doing that he isn't doing?
The economy is recovering, unemployment is improving... WHAT is Biden doing wrong where he's making some kind of mistake? Are you just complaining because he's a decent, honest Democrat and the mess he inherited from Trump isn't resolved after one year??
Beyond that, Biden has shown himself to be a relatively decent, honest and doing what he can with an opposition party that is doing all they can to fight him. He's listening to the majority of the nation and putting at least SOME effort (if insufficient, in a difficult situation) in doing what the majority of the nation wants. WHAT are you finding fault with?
Things are SO much better now than they were one year ago. Factually speaking when one looks at the data.
Do you agree with the reality that Biden has done NOTHING compared to Trump's misdeeds and there simply is NO GROUNDS for talking about impeachment? Where at least with Trump, even if you disagree, there were serious concerns. That's not the case with Biden.
Craig... "Double standard much?"
No double standard. IF Trump had merely been Trump and had a consensual affair with an adult and then lied about it, I'd call for him to be pressured to leave, I'd say that he should resign, but I don't think he should have been impeached.
But that isn't what Trump has done. The fact that you can't understand the difference between the vile perverse attacks on truth and decency and our free Republic and lying about a blowjob is troubling. Double standard, much?
Craig... "it's easier to bash Trump that it is to defend Biden."
Well, that is certainly true. You're right on track there. Given the great danger and corruption, it IS evil to condemn him. The question is why modern conservatives aren't more outspoken against Trump AND HIS DEFENDERS.
And it is quite easy to defend Biden. He's done nothing seriously wrong. Nothing.
Now, he's not gone far enough on many fronts. BUT, that is only because of GOP obstructionism. You can't blame him for that. But you CAN blame the GOP.
He has TRIED to overturn the Trump rules about immigration and he's made some progress, but he hasn't yet been able to fully overturn them.
You agree, don't you, that there simply is no comparison to the great corruption, dishonesty and wrong of the Trump administration as compared to Biden's first year?
Save your soul. Say you agree that there simply is no comparison.
Which side will you be on?
"And what about Biden?'
Clearly you don't read before you spew your ignorant crap.
"What does that prove?"
Well, it proves that he failed to fulfill his campaign promises and has dropped the ball on his promise to have tests available.
"The pandemic is beyond Biden's control and he's doing what he can about it. What more should he be doing that he isn't doing?"
Fulfilling his promises.
It's interesting that you're making excuses for Biden, while ignoring that Trump did what was necessary and got the "vaccine" produced.
"Trump's fatally ill-managed Coronavirus response seems to have turned voters off to him the way Katrina destroyed Bush's political reputation, but pushing a janky science vaccine into the public for political purposes would turn incompetent culpability into intentional harm."
Jamal Simmons
Strangely, all Biden is doing is pushing the exact same "janky science vaccine" as if it's the only answer.
Remember when y'all said thet Trump was personally responsible for every single COVID death? Are y'all holding Biden to the same standard?
"Things are SO much better now than they were one year ago. Factually speaking when one looks at the data."
Really? COVID spikes, inflation, supply chain issues, yeah, things are just awesome. FYI the GOP is currently the minority in both houses of congress, they can't stop anything.
"Do you agree with the reality that Biden has done NOTHING compared to Trump's misdeeds and there simply is NO GROUNDS for talking about impeachment?"
Seriously, do you not fucking read the post or the comments before you waste my time with this bullshit?
"Double standard, much?"
Actually, no. Not on this anyway.
" BUT, that is only because of GOP obstructionism. You can't blame him for that. But you CAN blame the GOP."
No, the GOP does not control either house of congress, this is simply false. If the DFL can't keep it's own caucus in line or actually submit legislation that compromises with the GOP, that's their own fault. Of course when the DFL does the same thing, it's OK.
"The economy is recovering,"
If you consider the highest inflation in recent memory and major supply chain problems "recovering", then I guess so. Of course, pre COVID the economy was in much better shape.
"unemployment is improving..."
Yet they have to lie about how much, by comparing the current unemployment rate to the highest COVID rate, not with 12/20 and 1/21.
"WHAT is Biden doing wrong where he's making some kind of mistake?"
Mostly his general incompetence, lack of coherence, ignoring questions in press conferences, inability to pass any significant legislation, failure to do what he said he'd do about COVID, failure to do anything about the border crisis...
"Are you just complaining because he's a decent, honest Democrat and the mess he inherited from Trump isn't resolved after one year??"
No, I'm not. The "mess" he inherited was 100% due to COVID and the economic disruptions from it. You really aren't suggesting that COVID was Trump's fault, or that the actions of Governors are Trump's fault or under Trump's control, are you?
Craig... " it proves that he failed to fulfill his campaign promises and has dropped the ball on his promise to have tests available."
And that is something that is comparable to Trump and all his corruption and dishonesty and actual misdeeds? The topic of your post is, in part, that Biden shouldn't be impeached, like, you say, Trump and Clinton shouldn't have been impeached.
What I'm saying is that there were legitimate grounds for at least CONSIDERING impeachment for Trump and Clinton. People from both parties acknowledged great and serious misdeeds by Trump and Clinton. There is NO SUCH GROUNDS at all, in anyway possible, for considering impeachment against Biden. No "high crimes and misdemeanors." At all.
The point I'm making is that it's comparing apples and toxic, rotten oranges to mention the three presidents and any consideration.
The problem with you and your Trump-defender types is that by comparing Biden's nothingburger consideration of impeachment and Trump and Clinton is it makes it sound like you all think they are all comparable and the circumstances for consideration of impeachment comparable.
They're not.
Clinton and Trump HAD some misdeeds that many people from all sides thought rose to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors." There is NOTHING of that for Biden. In the real world.
Now, tell me that you understand that and agree. It's important that we all can understand basic reality.
"Craig... " the GOP hasn't "sold it's soul" to Trump. (maybe some people have, but clearly not the party) "
You aren't this naive. This ignorant. Most honest conservatives who stood opposed to Trump have either left or been run out of office and out of the GOP. The few who remain have been severely ostracized by the GOP, such as Cheney, who's been rejected by the GOP."
So Dan thinks supporting a president who kept promises better than most any president before him...certainly better than the one immediately preceding him, as well as the clown who stains the Oval Office now...is "selling it's soul". That's rich, given Dan's own greatly at-risk soul.
He also has the unjustified arrogance to dare suggest what makes a conservative honest is opposing Trump. Truly honest conservatives acknowledge the conservative nature of Trump's accomplishments and naturally want more of it, as such is most beneficial for the nation. Dan's too much a liar to face that reality.
"Tell me you know this. It's important to me to know that you aren't THAT blinded to the degree which Trump bullies and controls your flaccid party."
That's funny. I wonder if Joe Manchin has any thoughts on being bullied by a political party? And look what happened to women in the Dem party who dared profess their support for the unborn!! It's crystal clear that Dan just says shit as if true.
"And what about Biden?"
He's an absolute clown.
"He's doing what he can."
Only another clown would suggest he's capable of doing anything after 47 years of having done nothing.
"He has committed NO crimes."
Tell that to Tara Reade.
"He's been relatively decent..."
Tell that to Tara Reade and the many women and girls he's sniffed, kissed and with whom he's gotten creepy. Tell that to the unborn who continue to be put to death because of people like Joe Biden supporting those doing the murdering. BTW, is it "decent" to eulogize two noted racist senators?
"...and honest."
OH. MY. GOSH!!!! He's the liar Dan accuses Trump of being!!!. Two proven cases of plagiarism. Countless proven cases of lying about his scholastic record. Continued lying about Trump saying there are "good nazis". Constant defense of mRNA drugs as safe and effective to protect against Covid-19. Or just read this one of many links I could have provided:
https://thefederalist.com/2021/06/24/heres-the-full-list-of-every-lie-joe-biden-has-told-as-president-part-onehundredseven/
"Do you agree with the reality that Biden has done NOTHING compared to Trump's misdeeds and there simply is NO GROUNDS for talking about impeachment?"
Aside from the fact that Dan has yet to provide a single Trump misdeed which justifies his opposition to a Trump presidency, Biden has at least a few Constitutional issues which one could easily argue are worthy of impeachment: minimum wage increases, allowing invasion of states, eviction moratoriums, "vaccines" for all fed employees. Seems to me, crapping on the Constitution a president swore to defend is a high crime or at least a misdemeanor and thus worthy grounds for impeachment.
"Craig... "it's easier to bash Trump that it is to defend Biden."
Well, that is certainly true."
But dishonest to suggest the intention here was suggest Biden is less worthy of criticism. It's easy to bash Trump for that which is unimportant and really all the Trump-haters have. Trump's personality is what makes it easy to bash him, not because he's actually done much...if anything...wrong as president. Biden's been one clusterf**k after another.
"And it is quite easy to defend Biden. He's done nothing seriously wrong."
The first sentence is only true if one lies and says the second one is true. Biden's entire presidency has been one egregious action after another. Dan is simply too much of a lying Trump-hater to admit it.
"You agree, don't you, that there simply is no comparison to the great corruption, dishonesty and wrong of the Trump administration as compared to Biden's first year?"
BWAAAHHHH-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!
Only a dedicated reprobate liar would dare ask a question like this!!!! Still waiting for a single factual example of Trump's corruption as president. I doubt one will ever be presented by this clown of a liar. One clear fact is that Trump has NEVER lied as badly as Dan does so routinely! Trump's a freakin' George Washington by comparison!!
Craig... "The "mess" he inherited was 100% due to COVID and the economic disruptions from it. You really aren't suggesting that COVID was Trump's fault..."
You aren't really suggesting that Trump did not leave the White House in the mess, are you? That he did not leave the state of the USN MS, are you? You? If so, then don't listen to me. Listen to the experts. Historians, scholars, governmental experts... the Trump administration was a train wreck. You know that, right?
https://www.washingtonian.com/2021/06/30/historians-trump-fourth-worst-president/
"You aren't really suggesting that Trump did not leave the White House in the mess, are you?"
I'm not sure what this even means, are you suggesting that Trump didn't adequately clean the WH before he moved out? Or that he some how left the entire WH in the "cafeteria"?
"That he did not leave the state of the USN MS, are you? You?"
This is gibberish, how can I answer gibberish?
What I am suggesting is the prior to COVID the US was in as good as position as we've been in for a while. Unemployment was down, the economy was good, etc. Then after the reaction to COVID, those things changed. The problem is that those changes were due to COVID and the reaction to COVID, not to the policies that Trump was trying to implement. Much of the "mess" was due to governors and how they chose to respond, not to Trump anyway. In short, while things were in a "mess" at the end of Trump's term, that's not the same thing as saying that the "mess" was Trump's fault.
I know it's easy to ignore reality, when doing so helps you foist a political narrative.
"And that is something that is comparable to Trump and all his corruption and dishonesty and actual misdeeds?"
Well Biden does have a decades long track record of dishonesty and plagiarism, so maybe that's not the best comparison. But, no it's not which is why I didn't make that comparison.
"The topic of your post is, in part, that Biden shouldn't be impeached,"
No, the entire topic of my post is that Biden shouldn't be impeached. That the GOP should actually govern and legislate and allow their doing the jobs they were elected for stand in contrast to the abject failure of the last 13 months.
"What I'm saying is that there were legitimate grounds for at least CONSIDERING impeachment for Trump and Clinton."
Obviously your confused if you think that I care what you are saying.
"The problem with you and your Trump-defender types is that by comparing Biden's nothingburger consideration of impeachment and Trump and Clinton is it makes it sound like you all think they are all comparable and the circumstances for consideration of impeachment comparable."
1. When will you stop the "Trump defender" lie?
2. My point is that while Clinton actually committed an actual crime which, sort of, "justified" impeachment. The Trump impeachment and the theoretical Biden impeachment are wholly political and would demean the process of impeachment.
It's important to me to understand what it is about "Biden shouldn't be impeached" that makes you think I'm advocating for Biden to be impeached? It's important to me to understand why you are wasting your (and my) time with all of this idiotic bullshit. I've been clear in saying that all three impeachments (including the theoretical Biden impeachment that I'm arguing against) were/would be to some degree or another political and as such cheapen and demean the notion of impeachment.
Craig... "The Trump impeachment and the theoretical Biden impeachment are wholly political and would demean the process of impeachment"
Well this is where I think you depart from reality. The vast majority of the nation including all rational conservatives recognize That impeaching trump was not a political act, it was an act needed to needed to try to preserve our Republic.
"Well this is where I think you depart from reality. The vast majority of the nation including all rational conservatives recognize That impeaching trump was not a political act, it was an act needed to needed to try to preserve our Republic."
just one more unsupported, unproven claim that isn't worth spending time on.
I am curious, since Trump was out of office when he was impeached, how does impeaching someone who has no government/elected position "preserve our Republic"?
Are you really suggesting that impeaching Trump after he left office prevented some sort of national uprising that would have been the end of "our Republic"?
FYI, had the DFL not waited until AFTER the 2020 election (which saw Trump lose), because they weren't going to pursue impeachment until they had majorities in both houses of congress, then I'd be willing to consider the possibility that it wasn't political. The reality is that the actions of the DFL certainly make it appear to be political.
"1. When will you stop the "Trump defender" lie?"
He won't, Craig. Dan's too stupid to understand the difference between defending Trump versus pointing out how stupid Dan is. Now I, on the other hand, will defend Trump, because as president he's provided so much for which he deserves defense against the empty claims and outright lies submitted by the likes of a Dan Trabue. He actually thinks there were legit grounds for impeaching Trump, but he was not found guilty of that for which he was charged in either attempt. So if he was innocent, then on what basis can a clown like Dan insist there were legit grounds? What are those legit grounds? And to what does Ducky-Dan refer when he speaks of "corruption and dishonesty and actual misdeeds"? He never provides. He merely says it as if everyone knows what he pretends he knows.
Again, Clinton broke the law by lying under oath. That means "a crime". Trump's record includes nothing like that at all. Not even close so far as anyone knows and can prove if they can even find the spine to provide. But was it enough to impeach Bubba? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean they should have gone through with it. The one good thing about it is that it truly exposed what a scumbag he is, and lying under oath puts a fine point on it.
But if we're simply focusing on Biden's time as president, he's done quite enough which justifies removing him one way or another, and to the list I've already offered, we can add his disrespect and ignorance of the 2nd Amendment. His proposals for "gun control" are rife with blatant acts of disregard for that which goes beyond just the 2nd. He intended to push for holding accountable gun manufacturers for crimes committed with the guns they sold. Now, setting aside for a moment the fact that the manufacturers are once removed from the actual sale to the person who committed the crime, to hold responsible a manufacturer would be like suing General Motors for someone using one's Chevy Spark to run someone over. It's absurd, but that's the guy Dan thinks is an improvement over Trump. Such as this is an example of how pointing to Biden's stupidity isn't a defense of Trump, but exposing Dan and others who voted for Biden over Trump as the buffoons and clowns they are.
"The vast majority of the nation including all rational conservatives recognize That impeaching trump was not a political act, it was an act needed to needed to try to preserve our Republic."
Once again the liar describes conservatives as rational when they oppose Trump. Those on the right who opposed Trump were indeed acting in a political manner by their opposition. Jeez, there's no way it's NOT political. Trump was no threat to the Republic. Dan's party is, as it has been and as it is becoming more so, the true threat and they've managed to find a couple Trump-hating Republicans whose alliance they stupidly think lends them credibility in their lie. The worst part is they can't describe in any way they believe Trump is such a threat. What's he done? What do they think he intended to do or intends to do and what evidence can they present to support such a claim? It's inane, which is right up Dan's alley. Dan's all about inane. Inane is what Dan does.
It's clear Dan just drools out inane comments derogatory to the GOP and Trump in particular. But he has no real way in which he can defend either his support for Dems and the doddering POTUS or denigrate conservatism, the GOP or Trump. His hate is no deeper than the perennial "Orange Man Bad". At least we haven't seen Dan say his nonsensical "embrace grace" line in a while. Small favors from a small boy.
Craig... "I am curious, since Trump was out of office when he was impeached, how does impeaching someone who has no government/elected position "preserve our Republic"?"
Because his actions - the very actions that continue today - CONTINUE to pose a threat to a free republic. He is actively sowing seeds of distrust in our election system by spreading a stupidly false claim that the election was stolen. That's false. That's dangerous.
Why do you not know this?
Because of Trump's dangerous false claims that he continues to peddle, a majority of the GOP think the election was stolen from him and that our election system is not trustworthy. In spite of the facts.
"when it came to Republicans, it was whiplash. Three-quarters again said it was mostly because he is right that there were real cases of fraud that changed the results."
https://www.npr.org/2021/11/01/1050291610/most-americans-trust-elections-are-fair-but-sharp-divides-exist-a-new-poll-finds
"82% of Fox News, 97% of OANN, Newsmax Viewers Believe Trump's Stolen Election Claim"
https://www.newsweek.com/82-fox-news-97-oann-newsmax-viewers-believe-trumps-stolen-election-claim-poll-1644756
"Polls find most Republicans say 2020 election was stolen and roughly one-quarter embrace QAnon conspiracies"
https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/28/politics/poll-qanon-election-conspiracies/index.html
Do you not see why this is dangerous and an attack on a free republic? Then follow what people are saying...
"The survey found that nearly three in 10 Americans, including 39% of Republicans, agreed that "if elected leaders will not protect America, the people must do it themselves, even if it requires violent actions..."
"...The level of distrust among Republicans evident in the survey was such that about 8 in 10 said the current political system is "stacked against conservatives and people with traditional values." A majority agreed with the statement: "The traditional American way of life is disappearing so fast that we may have to use force to save it.""
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa
With a big majority of the GOP not trusting the elections in large part due to Trump's attacks on the integrity of an election he clearly lost AND a sizable number of the GOP being sympathetic to the notion of violence to protect against losing "their" America... that is a dangerous and serious threat.
Do you not see the problem?
DO YOU RECOGNIZE that Trump's claims that the election was stolen are false and stupidly false?
Do you recognize the danger of fostering that distrust of the media, the election process and expert opinion as he is amongst the gullible portion of the GOP?
Do you recognize the danger of "media" sources like OAN and FoxNews supporting and promoting that lie is dangerous?
Read that last NPR article and follow that story line. It's unnerving for those who don't want to see harm to our free republic.
"About 3 in 5 white evangelicals told the pollsters that Biden was not legitimately elected..."
"The AEI survey found that white evangelicals were especially prone to subscribe to the QAnon movement's conspiracy theories. Twenty-seven percent said it was "mostly" or "completely" accurate to say Trump "has been secretly fighting a group of child sex traffickers that include prominent Democrats and Hollywood elites.""
???!!! Will you rebuke your fellow white evangelicals for going down this insane path?
Or here's a story about conservative former Republican Kagan explaining why Trump needed to be impeached and why his lies are dangerous and a threat.
https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2021/09/a-lifelong-conservative-on-the-dangers-of-donald-trump/
"Because his actions - the very actions that continue today - CONTINUE to pose a threat to a free republic. He is actively sowing seeds of distrust in our election system by spreading a stupidly false claim that the election was stolen."
I'm not going to waste time with your continued regurgitation of the same old narrative, but I'll deal with these two statements that seem to be the crux of your argument.
It's strange that the notion of not trusting the government gained popularity with the left back in the 60's. I seem to remember Hillary saying that questioning/distrust of the government was actually patriotism.
But this notion that the "election system" is worthy of some level of blind trust or is above reproach, or shouldn't be investigated, seems incredibly naive.
FYI, it's virtually impossible that Truman would have been elected president had he not been the beneficiary of election fraud in his earlier political campaigns.
Dan continues with his deranged need to believe that no one could possibly come to the conclusion the election was stolen were it not for Trump "telling them". An entire term fighting off bullshit allegations of Russian collusion and other false claims by Dan's haters of a feather had no effect on perspectives of what the left might do. Yeah. That makes sense. But then, unlike Dan and his ilk, we don't need to be told by anyone what to think, because we actually pay attention. Dan rejects claims of election fraud/irregularities because "election officials say". What a sheep!
Craig... " this notion that the "election system" is worthy of some level of blind trust or is above reproach, or shouldn't be investigated, seems incredibly naive."
We don't blindly trust the gov't. Of course. You can see that by our actions. We're very wary of Biden, for what it's worth.
But we trust data. The DATA shows there was no election fraud. DATA from reasonable election officials, both GOP and Dem. There is NO DATA to support these claims. They are stupidly false claims from an ESTABLISHED inept liar who has always been glad to take advantage of dupes fooled by his power and wealth.
Your willingness to endlessly defend this known conman is what is naive.
Don't be a useful idiot. Listen to reasonable conservatives, historians, experts, scholars and your own eyes. Trump is amongst the worst of presidents and his claims of election fraud are not data based. It's a scam.
Naive!? Please.
I JUST pointed out that 3 in 5 of your fellow white evangelicals are believing in Qanon craziness and that they don't believe Biden won the election... and YOU'RE talking about US being naive?
What does it take to open the eyes of the deliberately self-blinded modern white evangelical?! Holy crap!
Craig... "But this notion that the "election system" is worthy of some level of blind trust or is above reproach, or shouldn't be investigated, seems incredibly naive."
The election WAS investigated. Repeatedly. Time after time, the results came back that this was a clean election. The claims are not just false, they're stupidly false.
Do you truly not understand this? Are you part of the dupes/useful idiots that are being taken in by an inept idiot pervert conman? You can't possibly be this stupid.
Given your response and your lack of answering questions directly, it appears that your answer is, No, you just don't recognize how bizarrely wrong and historically dangerous Trump's actions are/were, nor the danger of biased "news" groups (not journalists) continuing to pass on and amplify these stupidly false claims. It also appears that you just don't recognize how truly stupidly false the claims are.
I don't know how to help that but encourage you to listen/watch more NPR, BBC and other reliable journalists, even if you think they have a liberal bias. Or listen to the historians and political scholars - left to right - they'll tell you how truly historically awful and dangerous this presidency and his con man way of playing marks by exploiting their fears and biases.
You all have fallen for an epic con. Listen to experts.
"Given your response and your lack of answering questions directly, it appears that your answer is, No, you just don't recognize how bizarrely wrong and historically dangerous Trump's actions are/were, nor the danger of biased "news" groups (not journalists) continuing to pass on and amplify these stupidly false claims. It also appears that you just don't recognize how truly stupidly false the claims are."
One of my favorite Trabue tactics, and oldie but an oldie. The "you don't answer questions" ploy when there is ample evidence that it's a false claim, is always amusing. But to pivot to the "I'm going to tell you how much more I know about you than your know about you." is impressive. The reality is that false is one of those terms that needs no modification. There are no degrees of falsehood. Therefore, when someone feels the need to embellish, my natural response is to suspect that they are operating from emotion.
Art,
Of course you are correct that literally every accusation against Trump has been demonstrated to be false, and to have been paid for by the DFL or it's surrogates. Anyone who continues spouting that crap is choosing the ignore the evidence. That's at least partially because the media gives way more attention to the original false claims than they do when those claims are proven to be false.
"The election WAS investigated. Repeatedly. Time after time, the results came back that this was a clean election. The claims are not just false, they're stupidly false. Do you truly not understand this? Are you part of the dupes/useful idiots that are being taken in by an inept idiot pervert conman? You can't possibly be this stupid."
The only "investigations" I'm aware of are several court cases that were dismissed before any evidence was presented, the AZ state investigation that (as I recall) doesn't support your "clean election" claim, and GA is finally going to investigate as well.
I suspect that you don't have any proof of your claim, or you would have provided it.
"Christina Cassidy: in the end, we found it was just shy of
475 potential cases of voter fraud in those six states, which would not have made a difference in the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.
Judy Woodruff:
And this was out of millions of votes cast, if you add up all the votes in those states."
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/exhaustive-fact-check-finds-little-evidence-of-voter-fraud-but-2020s-big-lie-lives-on
Yes, frivolous lawsuits and complaints that were based on nothing or upon empty false claims WERE dismissed. You NEED our court systems to dismiss frivolous lawsuits and claims because we're not going to go out and investigate claims that there were "1 gazillion votes put in for Biden from actual unicorns" because that would be just stupid. And only a little less stupid are the endless "examples" put up by idiot Trump supporters that we based on nothing. If you want to argue with the adults, you have to be prepared to present an adult argument.
Nothing claims WILL be dismissed.
This is part of the problem with the Trump ideology and how he's abused the system over the years: Empty, frivolous lawsuits to delay the process (whatever process, not just elections) and to bankrupt the system with idiocy.
We need to grow up a bit and that NEEDS, more than ever, to begin with the childish methodologies of modern Trump style supporters and defenders.
And here, again, you are defending Trump, by acting like these claims are anything but the vomitus that they are.
More on the nothingburger of "election fraud" claims...
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55016029
https://www.npr.org/2020/11/11/933937162/debunking-trump-and-his-allies-false-claims-about-the-election
https://apnews.com/article/voter-fraud-election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-7fcb6f134e528fee8237c7601db3328f
https://www.knau.org/knau-and-arizona-news/2021-07-19/ap-fact-check-trump-makes-false-claims-about-arizona-audit
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/dec/13/facebook-posts/review-did-not-find-more-illegal-votes-bidens-marg/
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/12/nine-election-fraud-claims-none-credible/
Over and over it's been looked into. Republican and Democrat voting experts have validated the election and dismissed any claims of widespread voter fraud. It was a scam from the front.
How do we KNOW it's not just a mistaken difference of opinion? Because Trump operates like a conman.
He began laying groundwork for these types of actions years ago. His endless attacks on the free press, on elections and on gov't officials are well-documented. These all lay the groundwork so that his "marks" will believe Trump and not the officials when he does actually lose the election.
The free press reported Trump lost?
Well, we can't trust that, say the useful idiots/marks. It's the enemy of the people, committed to overthrowing "our" America, they say.
The election representatives validate that, no, really, Trump lost? Well, you can't trust those gov't officials - Bunch of Demokrat/Socialists!!
No, wait, we're also GOP election counters. Trump REALLY lost and he lost big. His claims of election fraud and cheating are empty false charges!
Bunch of RINOs, bad as the Demokrats and the Enemy of the people Press!
Trump has been playing a certain segment of the population for fools, touching into their pre-existing fears and biases to get them to trust him (the SINGLE most corrupt and dishonest president in the last 100 years) over all these experts.
There is no There, there. He claimed right away, without any evidence, that he won and Biden lost. There was nothing to it. Then he just invented or grabbed on a bunch of conspiracy theory and crackpots who were wishing things were different, but there was never any substance to the charges.
People can make charges about anything without any evidence (and Trump routinely did/does). But rational adults don't have to give any credence to empty claims.
You know this, Craig. Be better than this.
Stop being a literal devil's advocate.
Dan,
I'm beginning to question your mental health. My position on election security is that we should strive for perfection, or as close as we can get, but diligently track any an all potential fraud, abuse, or errors in order to make elections as secure as they can be. Further, I'd suggest that it is in the best interest of our country to err on the side of being too cautious, of being proactive in investigating claims, of being able to assure the voters that their votes are valued. It seems that to judge a claim as "empty" before investigating that claim is not the message that should be sent.
I'm sorry if that eminently reasonable position angers you. Or upsets you.
Of course non of this changes the reality that there are multiple people on the DFL side of things that are arguing that the 2016 election wasn't legitimate 6 years after the fact. But you'll just make excuses for them.
Craig... " I'd suggest that it is in the best interest of our country to err on the side of being too cautious, of being proactive in investigating claims"
Well, this is where we'd part. If ALL the data shows (as it does) that we have nearly zero problems with vote tampering (well below 1%), then there is FUNCTIONALLY no problem with voter fraud in the US.
Those handful of times where it happens, more often than not, are cases where someone just made a mistake. The former convict who believed he now had a right to vote, but who was mistaken, for instance. In the smaller handful of times where attempts at actual fraud happens (the several Republicans, for instance, who tried to falsely vote for their grandmother or something) are just a tiny, tiny fraction of the votes. It's functionally meaningless.
Now, there ARE things we could try to do to move from FUNCTIONALLY NO problem with voter fraud to ZERO INSTANCES of voter fraud, but why? For instance, what if we passed a law that said, "IF you get caught even making an innocent mistake, you WILL be shot..." that may well tend to reduce even the few instances of error downwards a bit more. BUT, it would also have the effect of reducing turnout, and THAT would be bad for our nation.
So yes, that position - which I do not think is reasonable at all, given expert testimony - is not a rational position. Again, ALL the experts will tell us that we have functionally or practically no voter fraud in our nation. The experts will tell us that this is not a concern, it's not impacting elections, it's mostly innocent mistakes and when Republicans (and I'm sure, sometimes, Democrats) get caught doing it, well, they get caught and get in trouble. This is a made up problem that some in the GOP are using to try to help reduce voter turnout, which always helps the GOP, because their ideas are less popular.
So it's a stupidly false claim to say that we have problems with voter fraud AND it's a stupidly false claim to keep repeating the Democrats have said that they lost in 2016 due to voter fraud.
Repeatingly stupidly false claims doesn't help your case.
"I'd suggest that it is in the best interest of our country to err on the side of being too cautious"
How ridiculous. Want to set up machine gun towers outside of voting stations? "Can't be too cautious!" says the idiot.
Craig... "It seems that to judge a claim as "empty" before investigating that claim is not the message that should be sent."
Not all claims are created equal. Some of those claims were like, "The voter turnout in this district was 300%, which is impossible..." when a simple search revealed that it was false. There was nothing TO investigate. Same with all the other allegations. They alleged dead people were voting, it was researched and just not true. There was no need to further investigate, "Well, but what IF there was 300% turnout?? We should investigate MORE..." when it was already disproven.
That's what these Trump and Trump ally claims were all about.
Also, when you have a president, as we did, who was making it clear that he was trying to set up a scam to promote false claims about the election, then WHY give any credence to the boys who are crying wolf? There was NO SUBSTANCE to the claims.
How about this: FIND EVEN ONE INSTANCE of any of the Trump ally claims that has ANY merit to it that needs more than a cursory look to be disproven. Can you?
Are you suggesting, as the Trump-types like to do, some mass conspiracy between all these judges, GOP and Democrat election experts? If so, where's the evidence for that.
Occams Razor, man. The simplest most obvious explanation is that you have a very corrupt, very dishonest - historically dishonest and corrupt - president who is simply making shit up.
Don't be naive.
According to the data:
" The report reviewed elections that had been meticulously studied for voter fraud, and foundincident rates between 0.0003percent and 0.0025 percent."
https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf
.0003%. Out of ONE MILLION votes cast, that comes to THREE fraudulent votes.
This is not a real world problem. It's just not.
Do you recognize that this is not a problem in the real world? That your 3 in a million is meaningless? It's a flea on a redwood tree. It's the piss from an ant in a swimming pool. It's NOTHING.
Listen to experts, not corrupt lying pissants and perverts and their loyal useful idiots. Don't BE a useful idiot. You're being played for a fool.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ap-review-finds-far-too-little-vote-fraud-to-tip-2020-election-to-trump
Stop embarrassing yourself. This is not a real problem and to pretend like we need to make voting harder to stop those 3 in a million Republicans from cheating is nonsense.
Dan presents six links. Two are known for their many errors in "fact-checking", so they can be roundly rejected on sight. I only cite them when they rebut leftist idiocy because idiot leftists rely on them as if Gospel. The other four I'm not sure I wish to waste time reading, given the remarkable consistency of Dan providing that which doesn't back him up. It's pretty much every time, and today I'm just not up for it. So I'll set them aside for now.
Instead, I'll pick it up immediately after that to see Dan once again citing "voting experts"...this time Democrat AND Republican... who "have validated the election and dismissed any claims of widespread voter fraud." How nice. But the problem is, Dan doesn't say who those "experts" are and whether or not they can be trusted in giving a truthful assessment of any claims of fraud and on what basis they have dismissed them. Are any of these experts known for fighting against, say, ballot harvesting? "It was a scam from the front." says Dan. How was THAT confirmed and who were the scammers? To assert some unknown Dem AND Rep "election experts" "validated the election" doesn't mean any claim of fraud is a scam much less the claims made in the states these "election experts" dismissed claims. No. Dan merely reads some leftist source which insists fraud doesn't exist and that's enough for Dan. He's convinced simply because lefties publicly made the claim...as if they can be trusted.
But here's what Dumbass Dan ignores...if he's smart enough to absorb all the facts in the first place...this stolen election was not stolen merely by whatever dead guy voting claim was claimed. It was stolen through a host of behaviors lefty morons and Trump-haters haven't the honesty to acknowledge. An example Dumbass has failed to address is those states which altered their election rules without the authority of the only body Constitutionally authorized to do so...the state legislatures. The Electors of each state which submitted results after ignoring the Constitution regarding who can set election law should have been rejected by Pence and every honest American. Ignoring the rules of the game means disqualification. This game is far more important than any other and yet these states were allowed to ignore their rules and still be treated as a legitimately played.
And that's still just one issue which supports the charge that the election was stolen, but it is now added to any other, such as dead people voting, ballot harvesting, late ballots counted as if on time and many other issues. The only "con" is the one perpetrated by Biden supporters and Trump-haters.
"He began laying groundwork for these types of actions years ago."
Only a moron would say something like this, and a lying moron at that. Given the constant attempts by the Dem party to unseat a truly legitimately elected president, to suggest that it would take cheating to win the next election after his successful first term is nothing more than stating a justifiable opinion, and one with which any honest observer of American politics would easily agree. Because despite lacking perfection, no president since Reagan had done so much good for the nation in spite of constant obstruction from within and certainly from outside his own party.
"His endless attacks on the free press..." are actually justified responses to the journalistic criminality of the left-wing hacks at outlets like CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, WaPo and others. Trump never attacked "the free press". That's a Trabue-level distortion intentionally told.
And once again, no one who believes the election was stolen needs Trump to say it was. Honest people can see how the lefty press treated him, how the Dem party treated him, how members of his own party treated him and how NeverTrump conservatives treated him. Honest people can see how well ahead he was before the wee hours (whereas Hillary's lead was steadily diminishing throughout the coverage of the 2016 election) only to have mysteriously turn in favor of a guy who didn't even campaign. No. Danny-girl simply needs to believe that Trump-supporters are as stupid and sheep-like as he is.
"Trump has been playing a certain segment of the population for fools, touching into their pre-existing fears and biases to get them to trust him (the SINGLE most corrupt and dishonest president in the last 100 years) over all these experts."
What an astounding fantasy!! It's almost as wild as "white supremacy" being the greatest threat facing the nation!! I mean, really...people can make charges about anything without any evidence and Biden does always.
Rational adults need to prove empty claims are truly empty. Merely saying so don't make it so.
"So it's a stupidly false claim to say that we have problems with voter fraud AND it's a stupidly false claim to keep repeating the Democrats have said that they lost in 2016 due to voter fraud."
Interesting, I guess that would depend on how you describe "problems" and what your tolerance for voter fraud, abuse, and error is.
I do so love it when you try this tactic of making up some bullshit straw man, and then dismiss it out of hand.
I was quite clear in my multitude of links that the DFL has been claiming that the 2016 election was "illegitimate" for the years. The fact that you had to lie about what the left is claiming is simply hilarious. The fact that you pretend that the overwhelming evidence of the claim I actually made, doesn't exist is pathetic.
"How ridiculous. Want to set up machine gun towers outside of voting stations? "Can't be too cautious!" says the idiot."
Makes up some false bullshit and falsely attributes it to someone else, with a bit of ad hom for good measure, says the liar.
"Also, when you have a president, as we did, who was making it clear that he was trying to set up a scam to promote false claims about the election, then WHY give any credence to the boys who are crying wolf? There was NO SUBSTANCE to the claims."
Because, I'm strange about wanting to actually look at claims that are made, and look at the evidence before I jump to conclusions.
"How about this: FIND EVEN ONE INSTANCE of any of the Trump ally claims that has ANY merit to it that needs more than a cursory look to be disproven. Can you?"
Well, the AZ audit found some issues, and the GA audit hasn't started yet, but then I'm not trying to guess about who Dan might label a "Trump ally" so I can dismiss their claims before even seeing any evidence.
"Are you suggesting, as the Trump-types like to do, some mass conspiracy between all these judges, GOP and Democrat election experts? If so, where's the evidence for that."
No.
"Occams Razor, man. The simplest most obvious explanation is that you have a very corrupt, very dishonest - historically dishonest and corrupt - president who is simply making shit up."
You mean Ex president. As in private citizen, who has the same 1st amendment right of free speech as anyone else.
Obviously being in favor of less voter fraud, error, and abuse is a completely unreasonable position and justifies all of the lies and ad ho attacks.
""Occams Razor, man. The simplest most obvious explanation is that you have a very corrupt, very dishonest - historically dishonest and corrupt - president who is simply making shit up.""
Dan misspoke. Let me fix it for him:
"Occams Razor, man. The most simpleminded explanation is that you have a very corrupt, very dishonest - historically dishonest and corrupt - president who is simply making shit up."
There. That's better. And more true, as well.
Post a Comment